Astronomers Again Baffled by Solar Observations

SteakNShake writes "Once again professional astronomers are struggling to understand observations of the sun. ScienceDaily reports that a team from Saint Andrew's University announced that the sun's magnetic fields dominate the behavior of the corona via a mechanism dubbed the 'solar skeleton.' Computer models continue to be built to mimic the observed behavior of the sun in terms of magnetic fields but apparently the ball is still being dropped; no mention in the announcement is made of the electric fields that must be the cause of the observed magnetic fields. Also conspicuously absent from the press releases is the conclusion that the sun's corona is so-dominated by electric and magnetic fields because it is a plasma. In light of past and present research revealing the electrical nature of the universe, this kind of crippling ignorance among professional astrophysicists is astonishing."

whaa?

[delong]

What kind of horse shit story is this?

Re:whaa?

[massivefoot]

One that lacks a basic understanding of electromagnetism.

Crippling ignorance?

[rubberpaw]

>>this kind of crippling ignorance among professional astrophysicists is astonishing.

Isn't it rather an indication that they're doing their job? Data which challenge our current models are the most valuable things scientists can collect, because they give researchers chance to refine their theories.

If all the astrophysicists and satelite projects were returning information which merely fit their current theories, there would seem to be less need for such research. In scientific research, the known unknowns are difficult challenges, but the discovery of unknown unknowns are the wonderful bits. Definite Ignorance leads to Progress.

WTF?

[elvum]

Is Slashdot now a forum for random cranks to publish their personal rants? This isn't a story.

Crank crackpottery

[Anonymous Coward]

Er. Can we have less of the "electric universe" guy? Geez. Next you'll be posting Bearden rants.

can someone just tag electric universe?

[Anonymous Coward]

because i'm sick of reading their press releases. get them to put a few satellites up in orbit & do some observations, instead of speculating from the surface, then maybe they can publish some real science when they have some.

Slashdot is an easy target for kooks

[ebcdic]

It seems that any fringe theorist can now post an apparently topical article to Slashdot as a way of getting hits on their Velikovski-style planetary catastrophe web site.

Re:Terrible post --links to same article twice

[JensenDied]

Some people might call that word-wrap.

Re:WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's spam. One link to a goofy $2 website slathered in blatant keyword spam for Google... now hoping to pick up some pagerank by Slashdot and Slashdotter links.

Poor choice of words ...

[SplatMan_DK]

I find it unfortunate that SlashDot accepts an article with words such as:

this kind of crippling ignorance among professional astrophysicists is astonishing.

The writer displays a very poor understanding of the scientifical methods used in professional science. And SlashDot should have "filtered" this story.

I am tempted to write: This kind of crippling ignorance among article writers is astonishing.
But I would rather not spoil my positive Karma ...

;-)

The Tao of Slashdot

[florescent_beige]

The Yin: genius multiple-PhD types figure out something about the sun. Good for them.

The Yang: irrelevant mention of a cabal of self-referential mouth breathers who don't know energy is not a discrete thing but is a property of other things.

Maybe Slashdot posts articles like this to give us a poke and see what our reaction will be. That reminds me of a certain thing I can't quite remember, I think it starts with a "t".

One thing I noticed about Slashdot's feigned ignorance as humour (if that's what it is), it's always about things other than IT. For example, let's see an article asserting that integrated circuits are actually an alien technology harvested from flying saucers the US Government has hidden away. Not funny because it's too ridiculous?

WTF is this doing frontpage?!

[Anonymous Coward]

A bunch of crazy crank muthas want to shift some copies of their crappy book. Strange that /. wants to help them in that. Note to author: Yes, you did go for too big a print run. How about tearing the pages from each copy and using to wipe your ass? They'll obviously already be covered in shit so it'll make little difference to the strength of your arguments.
Take this down. Do it now.

pseudoscience

[king-manic]

Can we tag this pseudoscience.

Re:insane theroies 1 - regular theories 1 billion!

[pelrun]

Just because I don't have a deep knowledge of the part neurons play in intelligence, doesn't mean I can't be completely certain when somebody is acting like a complete dickhead.

Levels of abstraction. Learn about them, friend.

I guess I'll chime in.

[hardgeus]

Shame on you Slashdot for even letting this touch the front page. I read "this kind of crippling ignorance among professional astrophysicists is astonishing," and wondered who in the hell was who had the balls to say something like that...Is "SteakNShake" a famous physicist I haven't heard of?

Then I clicked that last link. Ooooh. This guy is nuts. Still doesn't explain why he got his rant accepted on Slashdot.

Re:whaa?

[niiler]

I'm pretty certain that astronomers have a pretty clear notion of what they are up against. You've got a plasma that must be modeled in 3D using Navier-Stokes equations with allowances made for EM coupling. You must also deal with the nuclear reactions occurring inside. The boundary conditions are ill-defined in that we must make certain assumptions about what's at the core of the Sun on one hand and where its boundary is on the other. Add to this the fact that the solar wind accelerates due to a de Laval nozzle effect and the corona seems to be hotter than the Sun's surface and you've got quite a quandry. It's not that the individual principles are not understood; they are. Rather it's how to put all of it together in such a way that it gives us the right answer. This is most certainly NOT the same as not understanding E&M! Sheesh!

Re:Crippling ignorance?

[Frnknstn]

No, this is a troll. The submitter does not believe the story he submitted. He only submitted it to generate the attention from outraged slashdot readers about the post.

Re:whaa?

[jcorno]

It's not that the individual principles are not understood; they are. Rather it's how to put all of it together in such a way that it gives us the right answer. This is most certainly NOT the same as not understanding E&M! Sheesh!

The corona is a few hundred thousand miles away from any fusion, with dense plasma in between. I think it's safe to model them separately. And the lack of understanding of E&M is in the post. "Also conspicuously absent from the press releases is the conclusion that the sun's corona is so-dominated by electric and magnetic fields because it is a plasma."

Re:whaa?

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed- I have my masters in astronomy and this article should NOT be on the front page of slashdot. Yes there is still a lot of study going on in relation to the physics of the Sun (and cosmology, etc) but there is already a tremendous amount we DO know.

That knowledge has come by through centuries of observations and - here is the crucial point - PEER REVIEWED papers published in legit journals for all the scientific community to comment, criticise and verify. If your findings don't hold water, well you have to go at it again and rethink until your theory matches observation.

After a quick look at the "electric universe" site it appears that as long as you are a "mythologist" (wtf?) and you can get a book published, then people should believe you.

Take it down slashdot, this is not news, it is garbage!

Re:whaa?

[Phil-14]

The electric universe people use that tactic a lot; quote some real scientists' new discovery of some physics behind space plasmas and say it proves their pet theory about how fusion doesn't really happen... of course, they never seem to say where the energy really does come from if "it's all electric." Maybe the windmill down the road?

Re:insane theroies 1 - regular theories 1 billion!

[pelrun]

How the sun sends the massive amounts of radiant energy towards us is not very important to a climatologist. What happens when that energy reaches us and how our environment reacts to it *is*.

By your logic, how can we *possibly* justify doing anything ever unless we are omniscient?

If your house is on fire you don't just refuse to get the fire extinguisher or refuse to call the fire brigade or refuse to LEAVE THE HOUSE just because you don't know exactly which appliance in your kitchen started it.

Re:Teach the controversy

[1u3hr]

This one is so bogus that it is suprising it slipped through

Obligatory: You must be new here.

There is no quality control on stories. No spellchecks, no dupe check, no URL check, no credibility checks. Obvious hoaxes and twisted interpretations are given full weight. The only questions asked are 1) Can I think of a funny "From-the-XXX-department" line?; 2) Will it stir up discussion?

The "ignorance" here is not from scientists.

[BrianRagle]

I have worked with scientists for a number of years from a variety of fields (I am a writer and interviewer). I have witnessed the gamut between arrogance and humility, as one would expect in any profession. Yet, I have never spoken to a single scientist or someone who works extensively with scientists who has said science knows everything there is to know. The very questions raised by the process of science is what drives some of the most dedicated individuals I have met. The idea that some level of "ignorance" on the part of science exists and is "astonishing" is merely indicative of someone who is inherently ignorant OF science. No scientist has all the answers nor, I would guess, does any scientist WANT to know all the answers. When there are no more questions, there is no reason to continue searching. The person who posted this story has, in my opinion, an axe to grind with science as a whole for what has probably been a demolition of some silly superstition or mythology, clung to so desperately by those who still need magic as an explanation for the world instead of the inherent splendor of how things really work.

Whatever questions there are regarding the sun and its structure will most likely be resolved someday, if the past is any indication. So too, will new questions arise and the quest will continue. "CowboyNeal" would do well to educate him/herself on this very basic aspect of human nature instead of issuing the tacit implication that because science hasn't answered some current question or another, its past answers must now be considered suspect.

Re:Crippling ignorance?

[Dr. Zowie]

Electric Universe is so incoherent that it doesn't even qualify as physical theory -- it doesn't make any predictions. I know -- I was in the fray on the Wikipedia page for many months. The page was finally deleted.

Re:whaa?

[aquabat]

Oh shut up, you nutbag. Really.

This isn't oppression of unappreciated genius, just avoidance of blatant idiocy.

What I like about science is that it doesn't really matter what either of you says. All that really matters is the math, testable hypotheses, and repeatability.

Re:Teach the controversy

[1u3hr]

It did get voted down by at least one reader in the firehose.

Exactly. It was published regardless. So what's the point?

Re:whaa?

[Gearoid_Murphy]

well said, I came to this forum scratching my head about the "electrical nature of the universe" statement, why on earth was this allowed on ./(????), the internet is full of nuts trying to push their own daft take on reality but as GBS once said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Re:whaa?

[JetJaguar]

Whether or not astronomers have a "pretty clear notion of what they are researching," does not excuse you from claiming that your claim is right just because you think the astronomers are wrong.

And how many of those google news postings are overhyped misunderstandings of press releases? Science reporting sucks in general, and I haven't seen a science story in the press that didn't overstate, overhype, or get something flat-out wrong for the sake of sensationalism in over 25 years. The evidence you site of astronomer's supposed bafflement is rediculous, pedestrian, and unworthy of any consideration what so ever. Try again when you have some hard experimental data that both disproves current cosmological theory and supports your own. Until then, you're either a genius or a quack, and I'm betting very strongly on the latter since you seem to be completely incapable of providing a rationale for your position.

Re:whaa?

[Sepodati]

extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

Yeah, must better to stick with the "extraordinary evidence" of black holes, dark matter and dark energy (which we can't see or measure) that have to be introduced to make the current theories work...

---John Holmes...